thanks for posting, I enjoyed writing a response to such a poorly thought out piece

 

This is a pretty disturbing article by someone who should no better, if he indeed is a fisheries biologist. The impact of river boating on fisheries is minimal at worst. Last I checked, they weren't putting portapotty stations in, on, right next to the water. He's making the grand assumption that the entire banks of a river is or will become a put-in/take-out. I wasn't aware that fish only spawn and lay eggs specifically where we put-in and take-out. At least I know where to fish now. right between the thousands of rafts and kayaks that are polluting the river with just their being present on the water.

Nevermind the fact that more damage was done to these rivers in a 30 year period during the mining boom of the 19th century, or all the road construction where they just seemingly chuck bits of rock off into the river, or the dams they erect to block a river or landowners who make lowhead dams under the max limit set by USACE so that they do not need a permit for so they can make their little private fishing ponds and post poles in the river with "No Tresspassing" on them so they can call the cops everytime they see a boat on the water approaching their precious "private personal space". Afterall, those are their fish.

Yeah, the guy's a twatter who needs to be bitch slapped. You're right, he's probably never boated a river.

 

What a d-bag. First off all of the degradation he mentions would be caused anyway without people floating. Streamside trails, parking lots and such are all used by fisherman. I'd bet most all of the trash is from fisherman vs. rafters as well.

Does anyone have this guy's email? I'd love to see his credentials, his degree is probably from Univ. of Phoenix or Devries.

 

Let's not fall into the trap they've set to pit boaters against fishermen - it's the classic divide and conquer scenario. The interests of public boaters and fishermen are closely tied weather we like it or not. The real issue at hand is of public use vs. private use, and I'd contend that private use is just as detrimental to the environment as public, maybee more so.

 

why does this guy think the bill would change anything? These landowners and this dumbass think that there are no regs for boaters and the bill would let "anything go"

 

The bottom line is everything we do causes some impact, as long as your way of helping to kill the planet is not the mainstream approach, you will be criticized, judged, and attacked when resources are tight. This is human nature. I looked at this guys picture and I think he eats too much. I think if he cares to save the planet he should stop stuffing his face, 70 years of overeating would surely have some environmental impact. Look at the impact humans create with food production. Could anyone argue that this is not damaging the planet, but everbody has to eat right? So we don't talk about that, we focus on things that we don't value. Boating is a fringe activity and will always be the focus of someones desire to divert attention from the real issues like overpopulation. It about human nature not logic.

 

Wtf is this guy talking about? Its interesting that the Ark, Fork and CO are some of the most heavily floated as well as some of the best fisheries in the state. Riparian zone? Last I checked those even had highways that ran along them. Fly fisherman and rafters generally share the same sense of being stewards of the resource. Somehow he equates floating with unfettered bank access. The dude is definitely backward.

Rivers have been the highways of America for thousands of years and should continue to be regardless of changes within the laws of recent history. That's my take.

 

OK, who wrote this:

Who's to say my floating down the river is any more damaging to the planet than Mr Mitchell's propensity to eat more than he needs to sustain himself.

I just shot coffee out my nose!

 

Ok I am going to say it...

Every one of the "right to float" issues we have seen in the past 10+ years does not have much to do with floating but rather the fishing of these streams. Many studies have shown that fisherfolks have the highest rate of conflict not with people just floating but with other fisherfolks.

The only reason these rivers are getting shut down is because of fishing - float fishing and fly fishing.. So I would not expect a support at large for the right to float from the fishing community... TU (trout unlimited) will not support any right to float anything.

From what I expect articles like this will be the norm and not the exception as we move closer to Nov.. Opinions like this should high light how hard it will be to get the votes needed in Nov..

I have also been float fishing for 20+ years and was a commercial float fishing guide for 10+ and still get out fishing more than most here around the Ark. I am not sure where the fisherfolks feel they get the entitlement to shut down the river but from what I see it is pervasive attitude in the fly fishing community today..

Just a opinion but I would give anyone 5 to 1 odds on any bet the if any bill just said you had to have permission to float fish over private land that all of this right to float stuff goes away..

I hate to say it but the "right to fish" may just sink the "right to float".....

Something to think about..

 

Same article here:
Steamboat Today: Michael J. Mitchell: Colorado’s rivers

 

That same article is making it's rounds:
Unlimited rafting poses a threat to aquatic wildlife | GJSentinel.com
Michael Mitchell American Fisheries Society unregulated floating of Colorado rivers - Google Search
Are Colorado's rivers really highways? - The Denver Post

 

It just occurred to me, this guy's article sounds like one of those "paid" expert testimonials.

 

Why the animosity between boaters and fisherman? Couple weeks ago I passed some fisherman who literally cast RIGHT in front of me, I was tripping out for a few seconds when it looked like his line was going to go over my deck instead of under and I was concerned about being hooked. Luckily the line went under my bow, I was as far right in the channel as I could be. I chalked it up to them being a-holes.

 

Make sure and remind everybody in your responses who Mike Mitchell REALLY is. He owns Queen of the River fish company of Longmont. he is a fisheries consultant consulting private land owners with fisheries on their property. He points out that he is a fisheries biologist, but he leaves out the fact that he is in the hire of many of the opponents of HB1188. He has a large financial stake in keeping our waters under private little thiefdoms.

What a weasel.

 

What would colorado do without the river revenue? He uses the A leads to B leads to C argument to specify how damaging floating is but...Well without revenue from the tourists you have a LOT of out of work individuals, lost taxes from tourism, lost monies which are used to improve the highways he travels on to get to work and without such he can't work?....Wait did I just use the A-B-C argument to determine how floating the river provides him with a job? I'm confused!

 

Maybe it's a coincidence, but there is a Mike Mitchell on the Colorado Farm Bureau Board:
Colorado Farm Bureau

 

If anyone wants to see what can happen when fishermen and boaters get together, check out the montana river access law Stream Access Law . It would be huge to have that kind of access for both boaters and fishermen in Colorado, and the Montana law was mostly passed through the efforts of fishermen. I think the best chance we have to get a decent access law here in Colorado is to team up with the vast majority of fishermen that don't have the money to fish private ranches and support a law that would benefit both groups.

 

TD and ******* have hit the nail on the head.

Most of these people don't care if we float through their property. They do care if we float through and catch the fish they are charging others to access. Many of them have re-shaped and stocked their segments of stream to be able to charge lots of money on a per rod basis for access to the river. While our interest of access are interrelated, the impact of taking a dory through and floating through in a kayak are very different. This bill is a political landmine. The politicians will awake a sleeping giant when sections of the Colorado, Arkansas, Gunnison, etc are suddenly closed off after land owners are empowered by this bill. Access to this resource (Rivers) will be limited to an elite class within 300 yard segments of property lines. All I can say to the politicians is be careful what you ask for.

The citizens of each town in which these articles are published should be writing the editor and asking how they could publish propaganda from a paid source as news?

 

The publications listed here are free local rags and in my opinion don't carry much credibility. This is not to say that I don't read them or use them on a regualr basis in these specific areas. I wouldn't lend to much to any of them except to find out what specials might be going on at local bars and restaurants and any other specific local dealings. That guy might have even paid to put the article in those publications as a sort of advertisement. It definitely seems to me that it is another attempt to divide river users. I know plenty of fly fishermen and they want what paddlers want, access.

 

Fishing / Boating

If anyone thinks these interest can't co-exists, go spend a summer day on the A section of the Green below flaming gorge reservoir. There is a non stop stream of Dory’s, kids in rubber rafts and canoes, and every imaginable craft to fish from. Amazingly, there are also incredible fish numbers. Management is the key, not exclusive access or prohibition on use. Ditto for the tail waters on the San Juan below Navajo. Access in the high water lines on non intermittent water is the only viable answer for the western boater or fishermen.

 

If anyone thinks these interest can't co-exists, go spend a summer day on the A section of the Green below flaming gorge reservoir. There is a non stop stream of Dory’s, kids in rubber rafts and canoes, and every imaginable craft to fish from. Amazingly, there are also incredible fish numbers. Management is the key, not exclusive access or prohibition on use. Ditto for the tail waters on the San Juan below Navajo. Access in the high water lines on non intermittent water is the only viable answer for the western boater or fishermen.

The San Juan is worse than the Green though in that the private landowners along the banks literally sit and wait for fishermen or rafters to touch the bed or the banks.

 

RDNEK knows what's going on.

The real root of the issue is that in this day and age, certain folks are willing to pay hundreds, thousands and even millions for the the opportunity to catch huge fish with minimal effort and have that all to themselves. Mr Mitchell and others in his profession aid and abet the situation by designing and building these "enhancements" or "improvements" to the bare minimum of safe passage the Corps will let them get away with, then these guys go and hand select the bigest, dumbest genetic mutant fish they can find and stack em up like cordwood in these new pools they've created. Nevermind what the river had as far as fish go before, wild rainbows, browns, and cutties won't get big enough and can sometimes be difficult to catch. The big meat they've installed in the river can't survive on the native bugs and forage base, so naturally they'le have to implement a feeding program. Any fool can tie on a pellet fly and jackpole these slobs of fish off a foamline like tuna in the good old days. When these "experts" are done with the place it usually looks like the flyfishing equivalent of an 18 hole golf course, sand traps, water hazards and all.

See, what they're doing here isn't without precedent. I found it amusing that early on in this latest round folks were all fired up about English Common Law. I had to guess that most had never tried to fish or raft in England. The U.K. and much of Western Europe has the pay to play model down to every last detail. If you want to fish over there, by all means you can. Any number of places on a hundred or more rivers all over the isles will be glad to acomodate you and provide you the best possible experience you can afford. Be prepared to shell out in excess of a thousand pounds of the good stuff for the first rate water, considerably more if you want more than the basic package. The second rate water can be had for around 300-500 lbs a day with a guide. None of it is any better than what we have here in CO, different and interesting yes, better not by a long shot. In short, this for profit model of fisheries has not been good to the rivers or the fish. Float fishing? Forget about it - doesn't exist. Just like we're headed for here, all the creative management over the years has killed the genetic diversity in these rivers, you can still catch browns and rainbows where they used to be, just not the one's that used to be there. The new and improved fish grew up in a concrete raceway, the old one's, long gone now, were native to the stream, born and raised there and living in harmony with their environment. Too bad they couldn't get bigger and be caught easier.

If any of that sounds far fetched, just sit back, relax, and watch the next decade on the river unfold. If we choose to do just that, sit back and watch, that is, I can assure that England is exactly what we'll get in that time. The dukes and duchesses will come to town and fence us out of what is rightfully ours. It's already happening on a number of rivers, and like any good pest problem you can be sure where there's one there's more. If we sit back and watch while the pests multiply, soon there will be too many to contain.

That's my rant for the day

 

I read the article and here is my take on it.

He's having an affair with Nancy Pilossi!

 

I enjoyed writing a response to such a poorly thought out piece

 

I don't get the war between fisherman and boaters. I've been on the rivers for about 12 years now and not once have I ever ran across anything but a friendly smile and a wave. I have many friends that live to fish and not once has any of them mentioned that people who float are the devil. Does the hatred actually exist or is it a tactic being used by these d-bags.

And did someone say this ass hat is in Longmont? I'm loolking his sorry ass up.